>
> Adrian Veith wrote in message <9mqjbh$dl9$02$1_at_news.t-online.com>...
> >"Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> >news:6QTj7.601$Ny1.123682876_at_radon.golden.net...
> >>
> >> I disagree that constraint declaration is programming. The ISO standard
> >> vocabulary requires a program to have both declarations and
instructions
> >to
> >> satisfy some particular task. A constraint declaration is not a program
> >any
> >> more than a conceptual analysis is a program.
> >
> >To make a distinction between a declaration and short method is quite
> >needless.
>
> I disagree. They are fundamentally different, and one can easily declare
> constraints that no short method could enforce.
>
> >> I understand that ODBMSes require one to program in order to enforce
> >> integrity because they generally treat integrity enforcement as nothing
> >more
> >> than a sub-task in every other task (or method, if you prefer).
> >
> >I can see no reason, why a OODB should not have constraint declarations.
>
> Relations and the relational algebra provide a very powerful means for
> constraint declaration. What does OODB have to offer in comparison?
>
>
> >But the point is, if this is usefull ?
>
> Of course, it is. Otherwise, how does the DBMS prevent a DBA from screwing
> up the data by mistake? Or do you only hire infallible DBAs?

If a programm at the client-side initiates the change of data, why should it
be effective to check the data on the server-side?
Anybody will agree, that it makes no sence, to initiate a change of some
hundred records only to get the server response, that you have violated a
constraint. Therefore, if you programm an application, you will perform all
the checks before you post your data.